September 27, 2009

93 - 95 Grand Street

Story in today's paper about monies being invested in the City of Worcester to stabilize neighborhoods by helping people buy vacant and foreclosed properties in targeted areas. Couple of things you need to know.

First, there are income restrictions. If you are going to be owned-occupied , you need to be low to mod income. Or if you are going to rent the units, you need to rent to people of low to mod income. Bottom line more low to mod income developments?

Second, there was mention of how monies will be used to demolish 95 Grand Street. This property abuts 93 Grand Street, which is owned by the Main South CDC who has used nearly all of their NRSA monies to date on 93 Grant Street, and I would imagine that this will somehow be awarded to the Main South CDC to compliment 93 Grand Street. More monies for low income housing.

Sounds good on the surface when you read about $12 million for neighborhood stabilization. The title should really be $12 million for more low to mod income development.

1 comment:

Jahn said...

Coucilor Haller said and I quote from the T&G:

"District 4 City Councilor Barbara G. Haller surveyed the surrounding neighborhood, saying they wanted to prevent blight from spreading to the quiet street.

“A lot of the houses in this neighborhood are owner-occupied,” she said. “If this stayed vacant, the sidewalks wouldn't get shoveled. Trash would start to accumulate

MMMM Ok barbara Soooooo therefore, houses & structures that are occupied like:

a. those of a certain unopposed city councilor and

b. those of another city dept bigwig and

c. those owned by the city

should all have there sidewalks shoveled by virute of the fact they are occupied......sorry Basa...not quite.


and also Barabra there's the issue of a certain rehabbed property on Main St in Main SOuth that always seemed to debris strewn about. I think it has a yellowish color brick facade....MMMMMMM